翻訳と辞書
Words near each other
・ Newfoundland Ridge
・ Newfoundland Rock
・ Newfoundland rowing
・ Newfoundland Royal Commission
・ Newfoundland Royal Naval Reserve
・ Newfoundland Rugby Union
・ Newfoundland School for the Deaf
・ Newfoundland School Society
・ Newfoundland Screech
・ Newfoundland Seamounts
・ Newfoundland Senior Hockey League
・ Newfoundland Senior Hockey League (1962-1989)
・ Newfoundland sheep
・ Newfoundland Symphony Orchestra
・ Newfoundland T'Railway
Newfoundland Telephone Co v Newfoundland (Board of Commissioners of Public Utilities)
・ Newfoundland ten cents
・ Newfoundland Time Zone
・ Newfoundland Tricolour
・ Newfoundland twenty cents
・ Newfoundland twenty-five cents
・ Newfoundland Volunteer War Service Medal
・ Newfoundland wolf
・ Newfoundland, Kentucky
・ Newfoundland, New Jersey
・ Newfoundland, Pennsylvania
・ Newfoundland-Labrador fixed link
・ Newfoundpool
・ Newfrontiers
・ Newfund


Dictionary Lists
翻訳と辞書 辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ]
スポンサード リンク

Newfoundland Telephone Co v Newfoundland (Board of Commissioners of Public Utilities) : ウィキペディア英語版
Newfoundland Telephone Co v Newfoundland (Board of Commissioners of Public Utilities)

''Newfoundland Telephone Co v Newfoundland (Board of Commissioners of Public Utilities)'', () 1 SCR 623 is a Canadian administrative law case decided by the Supreme Court of Canada concerning the reasonable apprehension of bias.
The Court held that the standard of bias may vary depending on the function of the administrative body. Those bodies that are primarily adjudicative in nature will be held to a stricter standard than administrative boards whose roles resemble legislatures.
==Background==
In 1988, the Newfoundland Board of Commissioners of Public Utilities held a public hearing before five of its commissioners to evaluate the executive pay and benefits package of the Newfoundland Telephone Company.
One of the commissioners, Andy Wells, a councillor for St. John's City Council, made comments to the press describing the executive benefits package as "ludicrous" and "unconscionable" before the hearings began. He gave a series of interviews discussing his opposition to further pay and pension increases.
The Newfoundland Telephone Co. objected to the participation of Wells, claiming that his statements created a reasonable apprehension of bias. However, the Board found that they could not remove one of its own members, and rejected their submissions.
Following the proceedings, Wells continued to speak to the press, making clear his opposition to the executive salaries in question.
On August 3, 1989, the Board issued its decision (3-2 in which Wells was part of the majority), which disapproved of an "enhanced pension plan", ordered a refund to customers for inappropriate executive expenses, but did not make any order with respect to individual executive salaries.
Newfoundland Telephone Co. appealed the order to the Newfoundland Court of Appeal, claiming that the Board's orders were void because Wells' statements to the press showed a reasonable apprehension of bias. The Court of Appeal decided in favour of the Board, but the decision was further appealed to the Supreme Court.

抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)
ウィキペディアで「Newfoundland Telephone Co v Newfoundland (Board of Commissioners of Public Utilities)」の詳細全文を読む



スポンサード リンク
翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース

Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.